|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-1672||10th Cir.||Feb 26, 2019||Jun 26, 2019||5-4||Gorsuch||OT 2018|
Holding: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit’s judgment – that 18 U. S. C. §3583(k)’s last two sentences are unconstitutional and unenforceable – is vacated, and the case is remanded.
Judgment: Vacated and remanded, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Gorsuch on June 26, 2019. Justice Gorsuch announced the judgment of the Supreme Court and delivered an opinion, in which Justices Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan joined. Justice Breyer filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Justice Alito filed a dissenting opinion, in which Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Thomas and Kavanaugh joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Apr 03 2018||Application (17A1065) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from April 16, 2018 to May 16, 2018, submitted to Justice Sotomayor.|
|Apr 04 2018||Application (17A1065) granted by Justice Sotomayor extending the time to file until May 16, 2018.|
|May 03 2018||Application (17A1065) to extend further the time from May 16, 2018 to June 15, 2018, submitted to Justice Sotomayor.|
|May 03 2018||Application (17A1065) granted by Justice Sotomayor extending the time to file until June 15, 2018.|
|Jun 15 2018||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 16, 2018)|
|Jun 28 2018||Motion of Andre Ralph Haymond for an extension of time not accepted for filing (corrected version submitted). (June 29, 2018)|
|Jun 28 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response from July 16, 2018 to August 15, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Jun 29 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including August 15, 2018.|
|Aug 07 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response from August 15, 2018 to September 14, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Aug 13 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including September 14, 2018.|
|Sep 13 2018||Brief of respondent Andre Ralph Haymond in opposition filed.|
|Sep 13 2018||Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by respondent Andre Ralph Haymond.|
|Sep 26 2018||Waiver of the 14-day waiting period pursuant to Rule 15.5 filed by the Solicitor General.|
|Sep 26 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/12/2018.|
|Sep 26 2018||Reply of petitioner United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 22 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/26/2018.|
|Oct 26 2018||Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by respondent GRANTED.|
|Oct 26 2018||Petition GRANTED.|
|Nov 19 2018||Motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.|
|Nov 20 2018||Motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits is granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including December 17, 2018. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including January 18, 2019.|
|Dec 06 2018||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner United States.|
|Dec 17 2018||Brief of petitioner United States filed.|
|Dec 21 2018||SET FOR ARGUMENT for Tuesday, February 26, 2019.|
|Dec 21 2018||Brief amici curiae of States of Utah, et al. filed.|
|Jan 07 2019||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.|
|Jan 11 2019||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 10th Circuit.|
|Jan 15 2019||CIRCULATED|
|Jan 16 2019||Record from the U.S.C.A. 10th Circuit is electronic and located on PACER. The record is complete.|
|Jan 18 2019||Brief of respondent Andre Ralph Haymond filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 25 2019||Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Andre Ralph Haymond.|
|Jan 25 2019||Brief amici curiae of FAMM and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 25 2019||Brief amicus curiae of Due Process Institute filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 25 2019||Brief amici curiae of Social Science and Law Scholars filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 01 2019||Letter Proposing Material for Lodging of Andre Ralph Haymond not accepted for filing. (Request withdrawn as record material received from Tenth Circuit. February 19, 2019)|
|Feb 14 2019||Reply of petitioner United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 26 2019||Argued. For petitioner: Eric J. Feigin, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondent: William D. Lunn, Tulsa, Okla.|
|Apr 19 2019||Motion for appointment of counsel filed by respondent Andre Ralph Haymond.|
|Apr 19 2019||Affidavit of service to motion for appointment of counsel filed. (May 29, 2019)|
|May 28 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/13/2019.|
|Jun 17 2019||Motion to appoint counsel filed by respondent GRANTED, and William D. Lunn, Esq., of Tulsa, Oklahoma, is appointed to serve as counsel for respondent in this case.|
|Jun 26 2019||Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Gorsuch, J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered an opinion, in which Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Breyer, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Alito, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined.|
|Jul 29 2019||JUDGMENT ISSUED>|
Today at SCOTUS: Two oral arguments starting at 10 a.m. EST. One is on federal anti-discrimination laws. The other is on Medicare payments for drugs dispensed by hospitals -- with big questions about the doctrine of Chevron deference lurking in the background.
Bill Cosby’s prosecutors asked the Supreme Court to reinstate his conviction today. Quick explainer.
In our latest episode of SCOTUStalk, @shefalil of @19thnews joined us to preview Wednesday's argument in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health. Shefali explains the current state of abortion access and the case's implications in Mississippi and across America.
Roe, Dobbs, and the current state of abortion access - SCOTUSblog
In advance of Wednesday's oral argument in the momentous abortion case, Shefali Luthra, a gender and health care r...
Update: Without calling for a response or referring the case to the full court, Justice Breyer just rejected last week's challenge from Massachusetts hospital workers who object to the hospital's COVID vaccine mandate.
(Breyer handles emergency requests from Massachusetts.)
JUST IN: Another shadow-docket challenge to a COVID vaccine mandate. This one is from employees at Mass General Brigham who say the Boston-based hospital violated federal law by not granting them exemptions from the hospital's vaccine policy. Filing here: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/21A175.pdf
Today at SCOTUS: The justices return to the bench for oral argument in a case about Medicare payments to hospitals that serve low-income patients. Lots of money at stake, plus potential implications for the Chevron doctrine. @JACoganJr explains the case:
Money for safety-net hospitals at stake in dispute over Medicare payment formula - SCOTUSblog
When it comes to highlighting the complexity of the Medicare Act and its hospital payment rules, Becerra v. Empire...
Two days from now, SCOTUS will hear the biggest abortion case in a generation. In a battle over a Mississippi law, abortion opponents are asking the court to end the constitutional right to abortion. Here's our preview of the case, via @AHoweBlogger.
Roe v. Wade hangs in balance as reshaped court prepares to hear biggest abortion case in decades - SCOTUSblog
When he ran for president in 2016, then-candidate Donald Trump promised to nominate Supreme Court justices who would...